DEVON STREET DISTURBANCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 16 September 1919, Page 7

DEVON STREET DISTURBANCE.

I BILLIARD ROOM WINDOW BROKEN. T in connection with the disturbance which took place in Devon Street early on Saturday evening, during the course of which some panes of glass in Mr A. Howlett's billiard saloon were broken, George Edward Casey appeared before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., yesterday morning, to answer charges of disorderly behaviour in a public place and of causing wilful damage by breaking a pane of glass valued at £3 las, the property of Webster BrosAccused pleaded not guilty and was unrepresented by counsel- Detective Fitzgibbons conducted the prosecution. Arthur Howlett, billiard room proprietor, said accused came to his saloon about 7 p.m. on Saturday. He. was not perfectly sober. He wanted to play billiards hut was not permitted. He then went outside, and witness heard a scuffling and accused and another man came through the swing door, breaking the glass in it. They were fighting inside, and in the struggle smashed through a big window in the front of the saloon. The other man's name was Land. The value of the broken glass was £3 15s. Ronald Land, said he met accused at the door of Howlett's billiard saloon on Saturday evening. Accused was coming out of the saloon and without any provocation struck him on the jaw. He retaliated and in the scuffle they broke the glass in a swing door and also a window. Accused was not sober at the time.

Constable Nolan said he was called to the billiard saloon on Saturday evening and met accused outside. When asked why he had caused the disturbance he replied: "You go and find out—l'll tell you nothing; you can prosecute me if you like." Land then came along and complained that accused had struck himCasey who was there, denied striking Land- Witness then went to see Howlett, and in spite of having been warned accused continued to "argue the point," and caused a crowd to gather round him. Witness warned him again and as he refused to go home he arrested him.

Defendant said after the football match he went to the Imperial Hotel and had about three drinks and then went over to the billiard saloon; but as he could not get a game he came out. At the entrance he met Lund who saicj something to him and struck him on the face. He then did the only thing natural under the circumstances and retaliated, with the result that they broke the glass in the door and the window. Howlett separated them. He said to Howlett: "You know who I am." They then went in search of a police officer. They met Mr Webster who asked defendant his name and address, and he j replied that Mr Howlett knew.

In reply to Detective Rtzgibbons defendant said he did not know Mr Webster. He might have been one Of the bystanders in the crowd for all he knew. He denied saying "Who the h— are you?" to Mr Webster. "You're a bit of a pugilist, aren't you?" queried the detective, to which defendant replied: "I wish I was!" How many drinks had vou on Saturday evening?— Three medfnm shandies. Continuing defendant said he was excited after the football match, and that might have made some of the witnesses think he was not sober. Detective Fitzgfbbon: What excited you at the football match? The Magistrate: "That Taranaki didn't win?" Detective Fitzgibbons: Why didn't you go home quietly when the constable gave you the opportunity ?—Because I had done nothing that I should go home for, I was perfectly sober, The detective: The usual drunken man's attitude.

Continuing, witness admitted he was at present occupied working in raein* stables. °

Wm. George Tucker said he was present at the door of the billiard saloon with Land, and as accused came out he went up to Land and said: "What about it," and struck him on the face. Land had not spoken to Casey, or given him any provocation.

In reply to the Bench, Detective Fit*. gibbons said the only thin;? known against defendant was'that about two years ago he was convicted and fined for a breach of the peace. Accused was convicted on both charges. On that of disorderly behaviour he was. fined 10s (in default 48 hours' imprisonment). The Magistrate remarked the fine was made light as delendant would have to pav the damage, amounting.to £3 I.ls, in the other case, in which the default was fixed at one month's imprisonment. Defendant was given 14 days in which to pay the amounts.